The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-04-20
Theories About the Origin of Gas.

1.-TWO theories touching the origin of natural
gas" says State Geologist Maurice Thompson,
shave been given prominence in scientific dis
cusson, and of interest to the general pub
lie. One theory connects the generation of the
gas with the presence of petroleum in the rock
where the gas is found. The other theory ac
been originated by the decomposition of water,
either by that fluid comingin contact with hot
metal, or by the operation of some chemical law
which separates the waters hydrogen from it's
other natural or accidental constituents 1t is
curious fact that the human mind, as q rule. is
more receptive of fanciful or thanmatursic
effects than of the simple impressions of plain
truth. In other words, when new thing is dis
covered whose origin is question open to inves
tigaton, it will be found that even some scien-
lists prone to try every fanciful theory before
accepting plain. matter fact, prosy solution
of the problem in hand. OF the two theories
have stated. the first presents great difficult
ties; 1t Is simple, practical matter-0f-fact. 1t
depends upon no farfetched suppositions; ev-
cry element of the problem is present. The
second theory is all theory, without one fact
actually at hand TO support it.
Let us examine tho elements of the second
theory nrst; hydrogen is an elementary gaseous
substance having the least weight, specific
gravity OF any substance vet discovered. 1t is
in1ammaoe. but 1t cannot by itself supnort COM
bustion. The greatest artificial heat is obtain
able by burning hydrogen in an oxvhydrogen
blow-pipe. In burning. hydrogen forms water
Dilute suphuric acio acting on zinc generates
hydrogen. does the action of heated iron
filings steam, and the action of eectricai
currents upon water. The most plausible sun
position of subterraneous generation of hydrogen
gas would be that of superheated
water-vapor coming into contact with
hot iron in the bowels of the earth.
The propounders of this theory say that water
might easily percolate through rock strata,
and thus descend to a point within the earth
where the heat is sufficient to convert it into
vapor, when it would rise, and in doing so come
in contact with the hot metal and be decomposed
hberating the hydrogen. This hydrogen, then,
which. in Indiana, would be the porous Trenton
limestone Now, it is notable that this theory
Is unobjectionable, save that it has no observed
facts to support it. 1t is passably plausible, but
has no proof. We see no hot iron; see no
water percolating down to Plutonian fires;
see no vapor rising 10 come in contact with the
unseen hot metal All is mere supposition.n
How about the other theory
LET Us state IL more fully 1t assumes that
natural gas is the product of petroleum, or of
the same operation that produced petroleum
AZ accounts for both petroleum and gas by max
Ing them result or results of the decomposi-
lion or caroonaceous matter, vegetable or AMI
nal, or both. Coal. bitumen, petroleum and
natural gas are closely coenate in origin accord
ing to this theory Indeed. to my mind. We
have fairly marked path by which, step by
STEP we may track the process Of nature in